The Creation Wiki is made available by the NW Creation Network
Watch monthly Live-Webcast - Like us on Facebook - Subscribe on YouTube

Malachite man was found in Cretaceous sandstone (Talk.Origins)

From CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science

Jump to: navigation, search
Talkorigins.jpg
Response Article
This article (Malachite man was found in Cretaceous sandstone (Talk.Origins)) is a response to a rebuttal of a creationist claim published by Talk.Origins Archive under the title Index to Creationist Claims.


Claim CC111:

Ten modern human skeletons have been excavated from 58 feet deep in the Lower Cretaceous Dakota Sandstone, which is dated as 140 million years old and is known for the same dinosaurs as in Dinosaur National Monument.

Source: Patton, Don, n.d. Official world site Malachite Man.


CreationWiki response:

(Talk.Origins quotes in blue)

1. The skeletons are the same bones as the discredited Moab man bones, apparently with skeletons from eight nearby Indian burials added. [Kuban 1998]

Both sides seem to be making the same mistake. They are both associating the two skeletons found in 1971 with the eight found in 1990. The two sites are about 100 feet apart so it is not unreasonable that they may be unrelated.

2. All details given in the account are apparently false. The bones were found 15 feet deep in soft, unconsolidated sand.

The top of the hill seems to drop by about 40 feet as can bee seen in an image of the site. The result is that the 1971 Moab man site is 15 feet deep and the 1990 Malachite Man site is about 58 feet deep.

* They were clearly intrusive (i.e., buried there long after the sediments were laid down).

This seems to be based on the idea that the Moab man find and the 1990 Malachite Man are related. There are reasons to question this conclusion.

The bones found in 1990 do not appear to have been carbon 14 dated. If you look at the large images, it is clear that these bones are in solid rock. Even if the bones were in soft material, the layers of rock above them were hard. It was the hardness of the rock that forced the closure of the copper mine that lead to their discovery. 58 feet is really too deep to be intrusive burials, particularly given the rock that would had to have been carved through to dig a grave. It is not clear from the two in situ images if these bones are fossilized or not, but the images of those bones that were removed including a femur and a jaw do seem to be fossilized.

The conclusion is that while the two finds are in the same area, they are separate finds. The two 1971 skeletons are recent, but the 1990 find is probably as old as the rock.

* The Dakota Formation is approximately 90-115 million years old, straddling the Early and Late Cretaceous. Dinosaur National Monument is in the Morrison Formation, which is Jurassic. [Kuban 1998]

Evolutionists date this rock at about 100 million years, but creationists would date it to the flood about 5,000 years ago.

3. The people making claims about Malachite Man have not been cooperative in supplying information which might be used to verify their claim. This would be surprising if they thought their claims could actually be verified.

Maybe they just don't trust those are making the request like Talk Origins. By the way when was the last time evolutionists made a major fossil find available to creationists so that their claims could be verified.

Personal tools